IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ids/ijpman/v10y2017i2p135-149.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

E-procurement implementation: analysing the applicability of the EPOS method on the efficiency of public sector organisations - a comparative study

Author

Listed:
  • Samuel Pule
  • Andrew Bakkabulindi

Abstract

This article analyses the differences in the use or applicability of the electronic procurement organisational suitability (EPOS) method between Uganda Revenue Authority (URA) and Ministry of Water and Environment (MOWE). Specifically, the paper examines the differences in organisational e-willingness, e-readiness, and the level of efficiency between URA and MOWE. To ascertain this, the researchers employed a quantitative paradigm that used descriptive and case study research designs. Means were used to measure the extent of applicability for the EPOS method and levels of efficiency among the two organisations. The independent t-test on the other hand, was devised to determine variations among the study variables. Findings revealed a high extent of using the EPOS method (average mean = 4.37) with negligible differences in its applicability (F value 12%, and sig. 0.021). However, high differences in favour of MOWE were noted in areas of e-readiness (F value = 58% and sig. 0.019) though the e-willingness dimension remained with low levels of variation (F value of 4%, and sig. 0.041) between the two organisations. In view of this, the researchers conclude and recommend a balanced approach in the implementation of any e-solution if effective results are to be realised.

Suggested Citation

  • Samuel Pule & Andrew Bakkabulindi, 2017. "E-procurement implementation: analysing the applicability of the EPOS method on the efficiency of public sector organisations - a comparative study," International Journal of Procurement Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 10(2), pages 135-149.
  • Handle: RePEc:ids:ijpman:v:10:y:2017:i:2:p:135-149
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=82783
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ids:ijpman:v:10:y:2017:i:2:p:135-149. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sarah Parker (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.inderscience.com/browse/index.php?journalID=255 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.